no.

NO. The "authoritarian scientist" label doesn't play out all to well in reality, do you have any significant connections to the scientific community as a whole? Do you work, live and/or socialize with them at all?

Scientists, by nature, are highly observant in their work in a very methodological way and take seriously the authority of the evidence garnered and the analysis thereof. The authority is in the expanding knowledge gained through the method, not the scientist. And they know that, historically, scientists have been wrong and understand the likelihood of human bias and error. This is why scientific research must be carefully planned and evaluated because the quest is not to prove a pre-supposed answer to an hypothesis, it's to exactly know wherever the data leads, even if it leads to the null-hypothesis. The door is always open to an hypothesis being wrong. An overconfident hypothesis (i.e. "We already know the TRUTH") will all too often be felled by high quality evidence in the long run. This why the scientist is most often also a skeptic and accepts nothing as an absolute "TRUTH" without the the highest quality of evidence. And a little voice in the head is always driving them with the whisper "I could be wrong - I must find out!"